Bombs on aircraft

[elprim 10]

Ray, there are more of us who share your view.In the moment some aircraft - on-line or AI - opens fire on me in MSFS, I'll format my disc.Fighter pilots can enjoy really nice combat sims like IL2 or lomac, so why not keep FS a demilitarized zone.

[Guest radivil]

>As far as I am concerned, even if it DOES attract>"undesirables" than it is only boosting sales of a very good>game!Given the inherent difficulty in flight sims, they've never really attracted the so-called Counterstrike crowd anyhow.I don't have a problem with combat aircraft and possibly combat missions. Whether you personally agree or not, military aircraft are the sexy planes and general and commercial aviation are boring to the average person. I mean, there's a reason racing games are popular but no one makes Interstate Commuter 2008. There are tons of people out there that couldn't tell you three kinds of airliner if you spot them 747 to start that could name 10 kinds of military plane. To use an anecdotal example, my brother could sit here and point out the differences between all the different kinds of B-25 but would be at a loss to figure out what's different between a 737-400 and 737-800. They're big, they're fast, and they're agile. People love their military planes. They sure don't fly CRJ-700s over the Super Bowl, do they? (I will concede that last season my college team had a C-17 and KC-135 fly over and it doesnt get more boring than that) Like others before me, the average combat flight sim doesn't have the scale modern military aviation demands. And a lot never had the less modern WWII era scale. I don't know of any CFS that you can take off in a B-52 from Barksdale, fly to Iraq, watch your cruise missile launch light blink on and off, then fly the rest of the way around the globe. Or fly an S-2 or P-3 from Jacksonville or something and spend a few hours assisting in sanitizing the Atlantic off Hilton Head so a sub can venture out from Kings Bay (which a few years ago on a flight to Miami I got to see from 35,000 feet, it was pretty awesome looking with all those ships and that boomer running on the surface). CFSs always have to have their little artificial square of the world to take place in. But grafting it on to FSX (or whatever)'s already coherent world would be a great boon to military flyers.But that's just me.

[Guest Stoopy]

Thanks, same here! :-beerchug We should join forces and suggest this in the "What do we want in FS11" thread... can you imagine the resulting screams??! (but hey maybe if PMDG promised to come out with a B-17 they'd reconsider, y'think??) :)Like you I *really* want to help dispell what I see as a tragic misconception, that the people asking for combat capability are kiddies looking for a bang-bang shoot-em-up game thing. Definitely the opposite except maybe we ARE still young at heart, but creeping up towards 50 years old I'm not planning to change that!It's such a perfect fit and we really do need the next-gen combat sim, and here's the leading-edge platform to make it happen without blowing anyone else out of the water. I failed to mention I still can't get 6DOF movement in IL2 with my TrackIR (only 4 degrees of movement), and doubt I ever will!S~Erich:-beerchug

[DadJokeCinema 145]

Crimson Skies is a great game. I have the original on PC, and the old FASA board game.

[Ray Proudfoot 8,954]

Hi,I'm back ready to fight the good fight ;-)<>Then shouldn't you make your feelings known to the producers of these military sims and ask them to expand their coverage? If Microsoft can give us worldwide coverage then other major software developers can too.<>That's precisely why I don't want MS to go down that slippery slope. I hope Aces won't go there whatever the pressures are from the public. I'm sure they won't. If you start where do you finish?<>But my argument is that once FS contains all this codswallop it will change these discussion boards and a lot of kids who don't want to do anything but blow things up will invade us. With FS, as it stands now, being a relatively 'boring game' for them they leave us well alone and that's how I'd like it to stay. A simulator for those who are happy to get their kicks just by flying a aircraft in FS as well as it's done in the real-world.I'm quite happy with the realism of accurate flight modelling, weather effects and the appearance of the ground. I don't need explosions to make it realistic.Why did Microsoft drop Combat Flight Sim? Probably because it didn't sell in sufficient numbers. That means a limited market. So why change FS to cater for those who want to engage in combat? They must be a small minority. Let's keep this a bomb and missile free simulation :-)Cheers.

[Ray Proudfoot 8,954]

<Probably because of the very limited market and the need to make it attractive to as many people as possible to make it a viable product.Seems like they made the right decision as it's now one of their most successful products. :)

[Ray Proudfoot 8,954]

Hi Matt,<>YYou're right, it won't but it may well change these discussion boards if FS goes in the direction of a combat FS. I would much rather MS bring out a separate product but that's been tried with CFS and for whatever reason didn;t last very long.From the replies posted here the overiding theme seems to be that you want global scenery for combat ops together with realistic weather and good flight modelling. If Aces have incorporated that into FSX they could do the same for a new product (or a separate addon to FSX) so those of us who didn't want that option didn't need to bother about it.<>Not at all. I'm just expressing an opinion. In fact from that single post on Sunday I'm quite surprised how few like-minded people to me have voiced their thoughts. I thought most people here would not want FS to go in that direction.<>That might please the bean counters at MS but I's rather FS stay as it is - a civilian flight simulator.Cheers,

[Ray Proudfoot 8,954]

<>:-lol Remember Henry Fonda in "Twelve Good Men"? It's me who's got to convert you heathans! :-hah

[Ray Proudfoot 8,954]

<>I feel like that little lad with his finger in the dyke trying to hold back the flood!<>Couldn't agree more :-)

[Ray Proudfoot 8,954]

After such an eloquent defence of military flight simulations I feel I need to clarify my position regarding FS and the possible inclusion of a military/combat element to it.I'll start by withdrawing my 'dumbing down' accusation. It was ill considered and clearly doesn't apply to many mature sim enthusiasta who relish the prospect of flying sophisticated military aircraft in the FS world. It's clearly as difficult to fly one of those successfully as it is with a civilian aircraft.I don't have a problem with military aircraft in FS. What I don't want to see is FS turn into a combat simulator. Microsoft tried that with CFS a few years ago and it didn't last. Other combat sims clearly lack the sophistication of FSX and so it's quite understandable that those who enjoy fying military jets want to see them in FSX.My reservations are limited to dropping bombs, launching missiles and generally causing mayhem. I don't believe FS needs it to remain attractive to the vast majority.Obviously nothing any of us say will affect any deciisions taken by Microsoft but these boards are all about sensible dialogue and I'm pleased to see that the discussion has been mature. Long may it stay that way.

[Guest Stoopy]

><>>>:-lol Remember Henry Fonda in "Twelve Good Men"? It's me who's>got to convert you heathans! :-hahSee? Already we've been upgraded from infidels and heretics....that's some progress at least, and we'll take whatever ground we can get! :-smile12 And "heathen" is definitely a status I can live with....they don't get tortured as much and seem to have a lot more fun! :-wink2 :-lol :-beerchug

[Guest Stoopy]

Well said, Ray, fully agreed and thank you sir! Was a pleasure "meeting" you in this conversation.Erich

[Ray Proudfoot 8,954]

Hi Stoopy,What a reply! I won't comment too much on each point you make but instead give a response on your overall message.Clearly the military sims you own don't give you a totally satisfactory experience because of the closed architecture and lack of resources to cover the globe in detailed scenery plus downloadable weather.You clearly want more realism and feel FS is the only product that can deliver what you want.Yiu are also sensitive to those who don't want their civilian 'experience' interfered with by combat elements should those be introduced into a future version. Perhaps the best option for MS to consider would be an addon similar to the Acceleration Pack that has just been released? That would allow those who want combat ops to enjoy all they offer in the FS world but wouldn't impact on those who want to keep it as it is now.And this is to everyone who has joined in this lengthy discussion... I've really said all I can on this now so I'll be withdrawing from the topic. Thanks to everyone who has joined in even those who disagreed with me! That's most of you then! :-lolMaybe I can find some time now for a bit of flying! :-wave

[Ray Proudfoot 8,954]

Hi Glenn,<>But I fear it would Glenn simply because of the attraction of dropping bombs and launching missiles. AvSim forums could change in character quite substantially and for me that would not be a good thing.<>I'm not sure how you could stop them taking over. Flying a jet within its designed parameters is boring to them.<>Thanks Glenn, I appreciate your open mind.<>I was there a week last Saturday with Pete Dowson for a technical tour of Concorde. It was a really enjoyable experience and if your dad hasn't been on it yet I'm sure he would enjoy it.Cheers,

[Ray Proudfoot 8,954]

Thanks Erich. Likewise :-)